STDF PROJECT PREPARATION GRANT (PPG) APPLICATION FORM $US50,000.00

Transcription

1 STDF PROJECT PREPARATION GRANT (PPG) APPLICATION FORM The Standards and Trade Development Facility (STDF) provides Project Preparation Grants (PPGs), up to a maximum of US$50,000, for the following purposes (or a combination thereof): application of SPS-related capacity evaluation and prioritization tools; preparation of feasibility studies that may precede project development to assess the potential impact and economic viability of proposals in terms of their expected costs and benefits; and/or preparation of projects proposals that promote compliance with international SPS requirements, for funding by the STDF or other donors. Applications that meet the STDF's eligibility criteria are considered by the STDF Working Group, which makes the final decision on funding requests. Complete details on eligibility criteria and other requirements are available in the Guidance Note for Applicants on the STDF website ( Please read the Guidance Note before completing this form. Completed applications should be sent by (as Word documents) to STDFSecretariat@wto.org. PPG Title Budget requested from STDF Full name and contact details of the requesting organization(s) Development of a Sanitary Phytosanitary Centre of Excellence (SPSCOE) for Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs) $US50, Biosecurity and Trade Facilitation Trade and Agribusiness Programme SPC Nabua, Suva, FIJI ISLANDS Full name and contact details of contact person for follow-up Josua Wainiqolo Biosecurity and Trade Co-ordinator Pacific Community Suva, Fiji josuaw@spc.int. 1

2 I. BACKGROUND AND RATIONALE 1. What is the purpose of this PPG? Explain whether it is requested to: (i) apply an SPS-related capacity evaluation or prioritization tool; (ii) prepare a feasibility study (prior to project development) to assess the potential impact and economic viability of proposals in terms of their expected costs and benefits; and/or (iii) prepare a project proposal for consideration by the STDF or other donors? Purpose: To prepare a project proposal for consideration by the STDF or other donors. STDF funding would be required for the development of a Sanitary Phytosanitary (SPS) Centre of Excellence for the Pacific Island Countries and Territories (PICTs). The Pacific Community (SPC) is an International inter-governmental and non-profit organization that has a regional mandate to serve its 23 Pacific Island Countries and territories (PICTS) member countries. This SPS Centre of excellence will focus on Plant and Animal Health measures in relation to Biosecurity, Market Access and Trade with considerable attention on building member country c SPS capacity of knowledge and skills in non tariff barriers to trade, such as proficiency in bilateral negotiations, market access submissions, risk assessments, surveillance and surveys, pest free production areas or zones, notification obligations etc to addressing Theme 1, 2 & 3 of the STDF criteria requirement. This will be compliant with international standards of PICTs obligation under the 3 sister standard setting bodies (OIE, IPPC, CODEX) to effectively boost the export of intra and inter commodities within the region for sustainable food security protection of its biodiversity, and trade facilitation. 2. Explain the key SPS problems and/or opportunities to be addressed. Clarify why these issues are important, with attention to market access and poverty reduction. Describe, if relevant, how these issues relate to SPS priorities in the Enhanced Integrated Framework s Diagnostic Trade Integration Studies (DTIS), the findings of SPS-related capacity evaluations, national poverty reduction strategies, sector development strategies or policies, etc. See Qn. 7. (b) (d) of the Guidance Note. The Pacific Region which was thought to be far away from its global markets in terms of distance, is now something of the past. It has now recognized as a major player in regional and global trade.. With the ever changing SPS issues, the Pacific will need to adapt quickly and stay current with the global changes in trade, cargo and passenger facilitation practices. Globalization has seen increased movement of goods and people across borders and the region is no exception. The Pacific Island communities have experienced increased cargo and people flows in the region which has increased the potential of risk of entry of regulated pests and diseases that pose a serious threat to agriculture, livelihood and fragile ecosystems. The environment in which agriculture commodities are traded has changed, more so with the introduction of the World Trade Organization (WTO), and in particular the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement) and the Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT Agreement) that together aim to reduce unjustified non-tariff barriers to trade whilst safeguarding plant, animal, human health and well being, and the environment. 2

3 The Pacific Region includes 23 countries and territories that are scattered over 36 million square kilometres of ocean. These countries are members of the three major ethnic groups of the central Pacific- Melanesian, Micronesian, and Polynesian with more than 200 languages spoken, including English and French. In terms of physical characteristics, Pacific Region countries have some common features, namely: relatively very small land masses, fragmented land areas, scattered island communities, and long distances from international markets, freedom from major, exotic pest and diseases of animals and plants, and limited technical capacities in countries to address SPC issues.. The topography of island groups in the region varies considerably. Atoll, raised atoll to Volcanic The PICTS face significant development issues with the majority considered to be Small Island Developing States and five are also Least Developed Countries. Strengthening the regions capacity in agricultural production and trade has widely been recognised as a fundamental need of future economic growth and stability. Equally, protection and enhancement of the regions existing natural and productive environment is recognised as a crucial, but challenging need. Due to the different topographical makeup of these 23 PICTs, it has been noted that they generally perform poorly in producing and exporting agricultural products and their difficulty in managing the associated SPS and other regulatory processes is a major reason for this. Adequately managing SPS issues relating to natural dispersion and the import of goods, equipment and passengers is also acknowledged as in need of sustainable strengthening. Various bilateral and regional programmes have been conducted in the past three decades to strengthen SPS capacity within PICTs, however, the continuity and integration of this work has often been fragmented at the the cessation of the various projects. Individual programmes in general may result in an increased SPS capacity such as achieving and implementing market access (with corresponding improved livelihoods) or specific surveillance, eradication or awareness activities. However, the long term capacity within most PICTs to build upon or maintain their SPS status and utilise the market access opportunities has not been sustained. STDF funded a Phytosanitary Capacity Evaluation Tool project in 2007 in which SPC took the lead role in undertaking workshops for STDF countries as well as non STDF countries. From the report it was noted that Capacity development and training of biosecurity personnel to implement technical requirements and function in market access negotiations, improving access to phytosanitary information, development of documented procedures, market access support, policy and strategy development, improved linkages with private stakeholders to facilitate trade and infrastructure improvements and investments were all highlighted as essential to improve general biosecurity and SPS capacity in the region. The Land Resources Division (LRD) of SPC has the mandate to assist PICTs to develop SPS capacity, and provides services in these areas. SPS related activities are currently delivered by three teams within the Land Resources Division: Biosecurity & Trade Services team, Animal Health & Production, team and the Plant Health Team. The capacity of the SPC Land Resources Division to deliver these services also needs support to ensure its long-term ability to meet the needs of the PICTs. Both, individual PICTs, and the SPC Land Resources Division would benefit from additional input to 3

4 supplement and develop the services currently provided by SPC, and ensure the skills and knowledge acquired through donor programmes are retained and utilised. Of particular benefit would be the development of a collaborative network of resources within the Pacific region to strengthen regional SPS capacity building efforts and increase opportunities within the region. It is proposed that the establishment of a Sanitary Phytosanitary Centre of Excellence (SPSCOE) for PICTs within SPC would be an effective mechanism of achieving this. It is envisaged that a collaborative regional network comprising the SPSCOE for PICTs would include various relevant government departments, research and training institutions, regional organisations and industry working groups, and market access working groups. Suggested collaborators include: SPC Biosecurity & Trade Services team; Animal Health & Production team; and Plant Health team Ministry of Agriculture and equivalents from other relevant PICTs Ministry of Foreign Affairs and equivalents from other relevant international organizations, ITC, WTO & EDES Biosecurity Authority and equivalents from other relevant PICTs National industry bodies (e.g. Industry Working Groups, Market Access Working Groups) Tertiary Training Instutions/Universities (e.g. University of the South Pacific (USP), Fiji National University Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research(ACIAR) DAFF, Australia New Zealand Ministry for Primary Industries FAO through the Capacity Development Unit.International Plant Protection Secretariat (IPPC) CODEX OIE Regional Plant protection Organizations (RPPO) such as APPPC The key focus areas of the SPSCOE for PICTs would be to: Provide training and capacity building to relevant PICT officials responsible for Animal Health, Plant Health and Biosecurity Services, trade development and biosecurity and Market Access. Training to be delivered through specifically designed technical courses/modules in collaboration with relevant tertiary and vocational institutions. Develop and improve linkages with relevant international plant and animal health agencies (government and private sector). Provide opportunities for exchange of relevant officials responsible for SPS issues between PICTs, SPC, Australia and New Zealand as part of a capacity building strategy. Develop regional approaches to pest risk analysis, risk management, diagnostics, surveillance and incursion response; in collaboration with SPC, PICTS, Australia and New Zealand, FAO & OIE. 4

5 Further promote technical and policy discussions by PICTs at the bilateral and regional level to better manage pests and disease nationally and regionally, and promote regional trade. Promote and manage collaborative regional strategies to manage pests of key economic importance that have the potential to impact significantly upon food security and market access (e.g. the FAO/OIE regional GFTADS programme) Encourage collaborative research and its implementation to address gaps in SPS capacity issues. Manage a scholarship program for PICT students to improve the technical and policy skills of recruits available for careers in the areas responsible for SPS issues. 3. Which government agencies, private sector, academic or other organizations support this PPG request? Letters of support from each of these organizations would be advantageous (Appendix 1). See Qn. 7. (e) of the Guidance Note. Currently the Regional Organization of the Pacific Plant Protection Organization (PPPO)/RTMPP members have given their support and recommendation in the formulation of the concept note for submission to STDF on the PPG at its meeting in September In addition this PPG request is supported by the Land Resources Division, SPC; and most likely by Department of Agriculture, Fisheries and Forestry Australia (DAFF); Ministry of Primary Industries New Zealand (MPINZ); Australian Center for International Agricultural Research (ACIAR); National Plant Protection Organisations of Pacific Islands and Territories; Full Board of the PPPO/RTMPP, Heads of Agriculture and forests of PICTs, and the Ministers of Agriculture and Forests of PICTs, University of the South Pacific, Fiji National University, IPPC, OIE and CODEX. 4. How does this PPG complement and/or build on past, ongoing and/or planned national programmes and/or donor-supported projects? See Qn. 7. (f) of the Guidance Note. The resultant SPSCOE for PICTs of the PPG would both complement and build upon past and on-going donor-supported projects by providing an additional unified SPS resource for the PICT region that would supplement the services provided by SPC Land Resources Division. In doing so, the collaborative network would retain the skills and knowledge gained from past donor-supported projects and provides an ongoing resource for addressing Animal and Plant biosecurity issues, and market access capacity building to supplement and compliment existing donor-funded programmes. The PPG would also work closely with SPC Land Resources Division to help build and maintain their capacity to adequately service the PICT region in the longer term. The SPSCOE for PICTs would work closely with and complement the current AusAIDfunded Pacific Horticultural and Agricultural Market Access (PHAMA) programme and EU-funded Strengthening Pacific Economic Integration through Trade (SPEITT) programme, particularly the Increasing Agriculture Commodity Trade (IACT) component of SPEITT which ended in February While these programmes are quite focussed on particular outcomes, the COE would have the necessary flexibility to allow it to focus on complementary areas outside of the scope of these two programmes. Given the small number of Pacific Island Countries included in the PHAMA programme(6 out of 22), and the IACT project (only ACP countries) the COE would also be a mechanism to further promote and se 2 project outcomes and lessons learnt in throughout the region 5

6 5. Have you discussed this PPG request or funding for the project proposal which would result from it with any potential donors (bilateral, multilateral, Enhanced Integrated Framework, etc.)? If so, provide details below and indicate potential sources of funding for the resulting project. See Qn. 7. (g) of the Guidance Note. This proposal was presented to the PPPO meeting in 2015 where general support was provided. The members of the meeting include reps from AusAID (DFAT), NZMPI ACIAR, FAO & PPPO. It is anticipated that additional potential donors would be approached as part of the PPG. II. IMPLEMENTATION & BUDGET 6. Who will take the lead in implementing this PPG? If particular national experts and/or international consultants are proposed, attach a copy of their Curriculum Vitae and record of achievements (Appendix 2). If no names are provided, the STDF will provide a shortlist of consultants if the PPG request is approved. There are no consultants identified by the PPPO, but will require STDF assistance to provide the consultant once the PPG is approved. 7. In the table below, briefly describe the main activities to be carried out under this PPG and specify who would be responsible. Provide an estimate of the budget required (e.g. for national/international expertise, travel and DSA of consultants, stakeholder meetings or workshops, general operating expenses, etc.). Activity Responsible Estimated Budget (US$) Canvas support for, and consult with key stakeholder groups to establish a program design for the SPSCOE for PICTs. SPC to engage a consultant $25,000 Develop a draft programme design for the SPSCOE for PICTs. SPC and Consultant $10,000 Consult with stakeholders and canvas support on the draft programme design for the SPSCOE for PICTs. Finalise programme design for the SPSCOE for PICTs. SPC and Consultant $10,000 SPC and Consultant $5,000 TOTAL $50,000 6